INTELLECTUAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY Grabowski The Construction of Ottonian Kingship Antoni Grabowski The Construction of Ottonian Kingship Narratives and Myth in Tenth-Century Germany The Construction of Ottonian Kingship The Construction of Ottonian Kingship Narratives and Myth in Tenth-Century Germany Antoni Grabowski Amsterdam University Press Cover illustration: Interior of Collegiate Church of Quedlinburg Source: NoRud / Wikimedia Commons [CC BY-SA 3.0 de (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/deed.en) Cover design: Coördesign, Leiden Lay-out: Crius Group, Hulshout isbn 978 94 6298 723 4 e-isbn 978 90 4853 873 7 (pdf) doi 10.5117/9789462987234 nur 684 © Antoni Grabowski / Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam 2018 All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the written permission of both the copyright owner and the author of the book. Table of Contents Acknowledgements 7 Note on Citations 9 Introduction 11 1 Aims and State of the Art 12 2 What is Myth/Mythology? 15 3 Liudprand’s Biography 19 4 Origins of Antapodosis 23 5 Language of Antapodosis 27 6 Other Contemporary Sources: Widukind’s Res gestae saxoni- cae; Continuation of the Chronicle of Regino of Prüm; Hrotsvit’s Gesta Ottonis 29 7 Interpreter of Liudprand: Frutolf of Michelsberg 30 8 Understanding Liudprand’s Works: Textbooks 31 Part I The Making of a King 1 Henry I at Fritzlar 919 47 The Beginning of a New Dynasty 1 King’s Designation 47 2 Rex Renitens 66 2 Otto I at Aachen 936 85 A Successor – Continuator 1 Death of a King 85 2 Rise of the New King 93 3 Anointment of the King as a political revolution 98 Part II King and his Kingdom 3 How Henry I Subjugated the Kingdom without Bloodshed 109 4 Otto I and the Rebellion of 937-939 125 1 Reasons for Rebellion 125 2 Similarities and Main Differences in the Descriptions of the Rebellion Found in Sources 127 3 Concept of Porphyrogenitus 130 4 Further Discussion of Reasons for Rebellion 133 5 Beginning of the Civil War in 937 151 6 Battle of Birten 152 7 After the First Battle 161 8 Lorsch Affair 165 9 Battle of Andernach 171 10 Aftermath 182 Part III War Against Heathens as a Road to Empire 5 How Hungarians were Defeated by the Ottonians 197 1 Henry’s Victory in the Battle of Riade 197 2 Battle of Lechfeld, The End of Hungarian Attacks 214 3 The Hungarians as Enemies of Civilization 216 6 The Holy Lance 223 A Symbol of Empire Conclusions 237 List of Abbreviations 241 Bibliography 243 Index 289 Acknowledgements The book originates from a PhD thesis written at the Faculty of History University of Warsaw under the supervision of Jacek Banaszkiewicz and was reviewed by Tomasz Jasiński and Andrzej Pleszczyński. I thank them for all the comments and help that lead to writing this book. I also thank the following people and institutions: Amsterdam University Press staff and the anonymous reviewer, Institut Bibliotheca Fuldensis, Magda Kozłowska, Jerzy Łazor, Beata Spieralska-Kasprzyk, Marta Tycner, Paweł Żmudzki and last but not least my family, especially Jadwiga, Katarzyna, Piotr, Franciszek and above all Edyta. Note on Citations The citations to the primary sources are shortened in keeping with the scholarship of ancient history. Where possible the citation consists of the author and original title of the source, followed by the book and chapter, or else the year if the text is divided in such a way. If the text contains no such division then, and only in such an instance, I use a page number. In the bibliography the exact edition used is noted for all sources. For translations only the name of the translator and page number are noted – translations are listed separately in the bibliography. If no name is listed, then the translation is mine. When I make a reference to the footnotes or the introduction of a translation then the reference is made using short title (and the text is listed among other primary sources under that short title). The exceptions to this are citations to Liudprand of Cremona’s works, Widukind of Corvey’s chronicle and both Regino of Prüm’s chronicle and the continuation written by Adalbert of Magdeburg. I note only the titles of Liudprand’s works (and Relatio de legatione Constantinopolitana ad Nicephorum Phocam is shortened to Relatio de legatione) – all citations are from Paolo Chiesa’s edition. For Widukind’s Res gestae saxonicae I use ‘Widukind’. With Regino and its continuation, I use only ‘Regino of Prüm’, which equally applies to the part of the text written by Adalbert. In both cases I am referring to the MGH SRG editions. I have refrained from translating dux into duke. From time to time I refer to East Frankish kingdom as Germany and to the West as France. This is done out of convenience, as the nineteenth and twentieth century historiography often conflates these terms. Introduction The tenth century was a peculiar age. It was Harald Zimmermann’s Dark Century,1 whilst at the same time there was also the Ottonian renaissance. For part of the older German historiography, it was the beginning of the German nation. The argument that Germany originated during the reign of Henry I, while no longer treated seriously, still looms over its perception.2 Later, Otto I’s imperial coronation in 962 was another focal point of history. From then on, Germany turned from a concern with the expansion into the East to the concern with Italian affairs. It has been argued that before 962 sources written in the Ottonian king- dom did not show any interest in the promotion of the idea of an Empire. There are scholars who have claimed that most people did not see the importance of the imperial title and that Rome was perceived as a place of moral decay, and not a source of imperial glory. The title was strongly connected to the King of Italy, so that both were used interchangeably. In some instances in Italia was added to the imperial title.3 For the early Ottonian kingdom there are four major narrative sources from the tenth century: Adalbert of Magdeburg’s continuation of the chroni- cle of Regino of Prüm, Liudprand of Cremona’s Antapodosis, Widukind of Corvey’s Res gestae saxonicae, and Hrotsvit of Gandersheim’s Gesta Ottonis. Adalbert, Hrotsvit, and Widukind were authors of the imperial era, who composed their works after 962. This leaves Antapodosis as the only major historical text written before Otto’s coronation. In my opinion, Liudprand meant to show the Liudolfings as the most powerful rulers of what he called Europe, both in terms of military strength but also in the expression of their dominance over other kingdoms. The chronicler explains that he wanted to write the history of the kings and princes of all Europe. But ‘Europe’ here should be understood not as a geographical term, but as a metaphor for an Empire. Liudprand followed the Carolingian authors, for whom Europe was identified with the lands ruled by Charlemagne. Therefore, in Antapodosis, kingdoms outside his regions of interest were ignored. He concentrated on Italy, Germany, and Byzantium, which were to constitute his Europe – the Empire. The thing which binds this Empire together are their common enemies, Hungarians and Muslims, 1 Zimmermann, Das dunkle Jahrhundert. 2 On this, see Groth, In regnum, p. 2-29. 3 Maleczek, ‘Otto’, p. 156-57, 170-72. 12 THE CONSTRUCTION OF OTTONIAn KINGSHIP who are viewed as pagans. There is no explanation for the exclusion of other kingdoms, such as France, from this construction. Europe and Empire are names standing for the continuation of the Carolingian tradition which treated them as synonymous. This construction had an additional meaning, with Liudprand depicting the Emperors of Constantinople as weak and laughable, to make the Ottonians appear worthy of Imperial glory. They might not have the crown, but it is clear that they had all the qualities which Byzantine rulers apparently lacked. They were thus de facto emperors.4 For Robert Holtzmann, Liudprand was the ‘most eminent historian of that time.’5 His emotional and vigorous approach make him one of the most important historians of the age.6 For Adolf Hofmeister, Liudprand was an author of a collection of anecdotes with simply a historical background. Hofmeister even made a short list of examples of his falsehoods.7 Martin Lintzel has noted that it is known that ‘Liudprand liked to fantasize and relate anecdotes.’8 He is the main subject of my book. 1 Aims and State of the Art This book is divided into three strands of argument that are concerned with different problems stemming from Liudprand’s chronicle and questions of how history was created and recreated by authors of three different eras. The main subject of my inquiries is Antapodosis and other sources about and from the tenth century. This will be followed with a note on how these texts were interpreted by the highly influential author of the eleventh and twelfth century: Frutolf of Michelsberg, and the way the history of the Ottonians was treated by German historiography of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The first aim is to explain and show how Liudprand constructed his narrative about the Ottonians and built an image of an ideal dynasty. Through his use of motifs and references to biblical and classical texts he made Henry I and Otto I into rulers who held every mark of being emperors, lacking only the title.